The Veteran's appeal regarding the June 2007 rating decision for compensation under 38 U.S.C.A. � 1151 was denied due to lack of evidence showing additional injury resulting from VA treatment, and his claims for increased evaluations were also denied based on the absence of additional disability attributable to negligence or other fault on the part of VA.
The deciding factor: The Veteran's claim for CUE in the June 2007 rating decision was not supported by clear and unmistakable evidence that the result would have been different if there had been a finding of error. The claims for increased evaluations were denied as additional disability is not shown to be due to negligence or other fault on VA's part.
- Claimed conditions
- Pseudofolliculitis Barbae, Excision of congenital dorsal cuneiform exostoses of bilateral feet
- How they argued it
- Direct service connection
- Exposure basis
- None
- Rating assigned
- None in this decision
- Decision date
- June 15, 2016
- Citation
- 1623886
This is a plain-language summary generated by AI from a public Board of Veterans’ Appeals decision. It can contain errors — always verify against the original. Look up the original decision on VA.gov (opens in a new tab) using citation 1623886.
What this means for you
A denial is a starting point, not the end of the road. You can see why this claim fell short — and, if you are still inside the one-year window, the appeal lanes that may remain open to you.
What you can do next
Related decisions
Other Board decisions on a similar condition or argued the same way.
- Denied
The Veteran's claim for TDIU was denied because the evidence did not show that he was unable to secure and follow substantially gainful employment due to his service-connected disabilities.
- Granted
The Board has granted an initial 10 percent disability rating for service-connected pseudofolliculitis barbae, finding that the condition affects less than 40 percent of the face and neck.
- Denied
The Veteran's claims for increased rating of right little finger disability and service connection for pseudofolliculitis barbae were denied. The claim for bilateral hearing loss is remanded due to missing private treatment records.
- Granted
The Board has found that the Veteran requires personal care services for a minimum of six continuous months based on his inability to perform activities of daily living and need for supervision or protection due to symptoms or residuals of neurological or other impairment. The VA will now evaluate whether participation in the PCAFC program is in the Veteran's best interest.
Free starter guide for your own claim
Reading this because you were denied or under-rated? Get the plain-English next steps — your appeal options, the deadline that protects you, and how appeals like yours turn out. One email, no spam.
We will only use this to send the guide. No spam, unsubscribe any time. We never sell your information.
We are not the VA. Veterans’ Rights is an independent resource built for veterans. We are not the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs, not part of the government, and not endorsed by any government agency.
This is general information, not legal advice. For advice about your own situation, talk to a VA-accredited representative — many help for free.